| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-Id: <1181859896.5211.38.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2007 23:24:55 +0100 From: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org> To: Daniel Hazelton <dhazelton@...er.net> Cc: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>, Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@...hat.com>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>, debian developer <debiandev@...il.com>, david@...g.hm, Tarkan Erimer <tarkan@...one.net.tr>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, mingo@...e.hu Subject: Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 On Wed, 2007-06-13 at 21:29 -0400, Daniel Hazelton wrote: > Agreed. However, AFAICT, TiVO meets the provisions of the GPLv2 - they make > the source of the GPL'd part of their system available. (And I'm not going to > get into arguments over whether kernel modules are "derivative works" or not, > since those invariably end up with "They aren't, even though we think they > should be") Who cares about whether the module is a derivative work? That's only relevant when you distribute the module as a separate work. When you ship a combined work including both the kernel and the module in question, it's a _whole_ lot easier to interpret the GPL. -- dwmw2 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists